Womens Rights groups, like NOW, commendably call out advertisers and networks for airing sexist and demeaning portrayals of women that lead to young womens diminished self-esteem and acceptance of roles as mere sexed-up objects.

What a ridiculous situation theyre getting themselves into now with their protest of CBS airing a pro-life ad during the upcoming Super Bowl game. The ad will feature Heisman trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mom, and theyll speak to the sanctity of life and the beautiful potential within every innocent child as Mrs. Tebow acknowledges her choice to give Tim life, despite less than ideal circumstances. Messages like this empower women! This speaks to the strength and commitment and nurturing spirit within women. The message says everything positive and nothing negative about the power of women  and life. Evidently, some womens rights groups like NOW do not like that message.

NOW is looking at the pro-life issue backwards. Women should be reminded that they are strong enough and smart enough to make decisions that allow for career and educational opportunities while still giving their babies a chance at life. In my own home, my daughter Bristol has also been challenged by pro-abortion womens rights groups who dont agree with her decision to have her baby, nor do they like the abstinence message which she articulated as her personal commitment. NOW could gain ground and credibility with everyday Americans, thus allowing their pro-women message to be heard by more than just their ardent supporters, if they made wiser decisions regarding which battles to pick. They should call attention to and embrace the Tebows message, instead of covertly and overtly disrespecting what Mrs. Tebow, Bristol, and millions of other women have chosen to do (in less than ideal circumstances).

My message to these groups who are inexplicably offended by a pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life message airing during the Super Bowl: please concentrate on empowering women, help with efforts to prevent unexpected pregnancies, stay consistent with your message that for too long women have been made to feel like sex objects in our modern culture and that we can expect better in 2010. But dont let your double standard glare so vividly as to undo some of the good to which you could contribute.

And CBS: just do the right thing. Dont cave. Have the backbone to run the ad.

Womens Rights groups, like NOW, commendably call out advertisers and networks for airing sexist and demeaning portrayals of women that lead to young womens diminished self-esteem and acceptance of roles as mere sexed-up objects.

They do? This must keep them busier than a pack of bird dogs.

3
posted on 01/27/2010 12:27:09 AM PST
by HiTech RedNeck
(I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))

She almost sounds as if NOW is a great organization were it not for this one little flaw about abortion. Quite the contrary. And, for example, note their defense of Bill Clinton over having sex with an employee more than half his age.

Sarah either is naive or she’s trying to persuade NOW by choosing to highlight what she thinks are their positives - sort of like praising Mussolini for his devotion to train punctuality.

Sensible people could suggest that the ad encourages people to make a choice for life. The opposition to this ad doesn’t want people to make such a choice. So for pro-choice people, there is no choice.

God, expose the lies coming from these people. Don’t stop until every lie is utterly exposed. Do it in our lifetimes so that we can relish in their defeat.

NOW and the women's lib movement are directly responsible for the degrading culture of young women today. Their 'sexual freedom and equality' lie has turned young women into the very thing they didn't want- sexual objects.

Sarah hit this one square on. But we all know NOW isn't for empowering all women- just women who are pro abortion (and liberal).

Didn’t get that tone at all. In fact, I got an admonishment, almost sarcastic tone from this. She knows they’re a bunk organization, so why not use their own alleged philosophy of empowering women against them? Brilliant.

Sometimes you appeal to an opponent’s better nature in public even though you know they’ll never do the right thing. It keeps you on the high road and highlights how easily they could do the right thing. It’s ffective rhetoric. Keep in mind that whether she runs for President or just promotes conservatism, winning over independents and other people who think these groups are mainly or somewhat positive is going to be necessary.

I understand what you mean! But I think Sarah is casting light on the inherent contradictions in NOW’s position -— not only about abortion but about their whole agenda.

On the one hand, NOW promotes women as strong, smart, etc. But then they pivot and say women are so incompetent at managing their lives that they have to kill their babies. NOW says we can handle the presidency, but can’t handle a pregnancy.

Sarah cuts right through that. She rightly points out that it’s a woman’s strength that empowers her to uphold the integrity of her principles through an untimely or difficult pregnancy, to get on brilliantly with her own life without sacrificing her child.

27
posted on 01/27/2010 7:09:20 AM PST
by Mrs. Don-o
("Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." George Orwell)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.